View Single Post
Old 08-12-2018, 09:21 PM   #11  
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 2,815

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
I'm sure they would argue you have no disability at all, ...
I don't doubt you are right, but the revisions to the law made after Sutton were specifically designed to preclude that argument from being successful, to whit:

Fifth, the law removes from the “regarded as” prong of the disability definition (the third prong of the definition) the requirement that an individual demonstrate that the impairment that he or she has, or is perceived to have, limits a major life activity in a way that is perceived to be substantial. Under the ADAAA, therefore, an individual can establish coverage under the law by showing that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under the Act because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment that is not transitory and minor.[22] The law also explicitly states that although individuals who fall solely under the “regarded as” prong of the definition of disability are protected from discrimination, entities covered by the ADA are not required to provide accommodations, or to modify policies and procedures, for such persons.[22]

and would be more than capable of performing the job. But they have (at least) 100 other equally qualified applicants for the same job, and are simply trying to fine tune the "fit" of their employees (for everyone's benefit).
Irrelevant under the law. Other employees might feel the "fit" would be better if Jews, African-Americans, females, or Democrats were excluded. You can't legally do that either. Well, Democrats maybe...
Excargodog is offline